Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Sack the Judges

Options
  • 12-03-2007 6:32pm
    #1
    DonJose
    Registered Users Posts: 3,470 ✭✭✭


    WTF is going on with our legal system. I can't remember one pedophile ever getting a custodial sentence for possessing child pornography, they all get off with suspended sentences. And now a convicted rapist gets a 3 year suspended sentence. WFT.

    A Clare man has walked free from the Central Criminal Court, after receiving a three year suspended sentence for raping a woman in her home while she slept.
    20 year old Adam Keane, a bricklayer from Barnageeha, Daragh in Clare, was convicted last month of raping the now 33 year old woman on May 30th 2005.

    http://www.unison.ie/breakingnews/index.php3?ca=9&si=107508


«1

Comments

  • Options
    #2
    DonJose
    Registered Users Posts: 3,470 ✭✭✭DonJose


    To show how inconsistent sentencing is, one scum scumbag gets 3 years suspended, another gets 15 years. Rape should have a mandatory sentence of at least 15 years.

    A Tipperary man who raped an elderly woman at her home in the middle of the night almost two years ago has been jailed for 15 years.
    Twenty-year-old Joseph Cummins, of St Joseph's Park, was convicted by a jury at the Central Criminal Court sitting in Limerick in February.

    http://www.unison.ie/breakingnews/index.php3?ca=9&si=107493


  • Options
    #3
    Celticfire
    Registered Users Posts: 1,702 ✭✭✭Celticfire


    They along with the DPP should be made run for election every 5 years. Then at least they might have to answer to the people why they make these decisions.


  • Options
    #4
    Dave!
    Closed Accounts Posts: 27,857 ✭✭✭✭Dave!


    DonJose wrote:
    To show how inconsistent sentencing is, one scum scumbag gets 3 years suspended, another gets 15 years. Rape should have a mandatory sentence of at least 15 years.

    A Tipperary man who raped an elderly woman at her home in the middle of the night almost two years ago has been jailed for 15 years.
    Twenty-year-old Joseph Cummins, of St Joseph's Park, was convicted by a jury at the Central Criminal Court sitting in Limerick in February.

    http://www.unison.ie/breakingnews/index.php3?ca=9&si=107493
    " The court heard that, after the verdict was returned in February, Cummins looked at the family and said: "Don't think this is over." "

    Classy bloke.


  • Options
    #5
    DarkJager
    Closed Accounts Posts: 7,960 ✭✭✭DarkJager


    A very stupid bloke from the sounds of things. Does he think he's going to wander out of jail when his sentence is finshed and a few family members won't be waiting to break him in half??


  • Options
    #6
    shane86
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,584 ✭✭✭shane86


    DaveMcG wrote:
    " The court heard that, after the verdict was returned in February, Cummins looked at the family and said: "Don't think this is over." "

    Classy bloke.

    Rather like the way some family members of the burglar who killed the Chinese guy recently started shouting abuse at the victims family.

    While you can half understand this happening if the murder was at the height of some long running dispute between a pair......shouting abuse because your tit of a relative stabbed someone they didnt know in their own home?:confused:


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #7
    WindSock
    Closed Accounts Posts: 18,239 ✭✭✭✭WindSock


    They should abolish prison sentances altogether for rapists and just have hired goons to beat them within an inch of their lives and be held down while the victim gets to anally rape them with a giant dildo.
    Do we have a part in our constitution about 'cruel and unusual punishment?


  • Options
    #8
    seamus
    Registered Users Posts: 68,317 ✭✭✭✭seamus


    I think one of the major issues with our legal system is that judges are allowed to overrule minimum sentences if the judge thinks it's unreasonable. They are a little out of touch with reality in my opinion.

    That piece of **** from Tipperary had SIXTY previous offences. 15 years was too little. He shouldn't be walking free until he's well into his forties, but he won't even be thirty when he does get out and offends again.

    Sentence appeals should also be decided by juries instead of the current system, which would hopefully discourage scum from appealing their sentences and wasting our money.


  • Options
    #9
    Sangre
    Registered Users Posts: 12,153 ✭✭✭✭Sangre


    Celticfire wrote:
    They along with the DPP should be made run for election every 5 years. Then at least they might have to answer to the people why they make these decisions.
    While there a lot of problems with the judicial system and sentencing that would be a terrible idea. A legal system needs to be above random public whims and mob rule.


  • Options
    #10
    Guy:Incognito
    Registered Users Posts: 38,247 ✭✭✭✭Guy:Incognito


    Was there not a mandatory 10 (just using that as a figure) sentence brought in for people caught in posetion of a certain amount of drugs (over €20k worth) but judges are still handing down their own sentences.

    It really smacks of "the government arent makign our decisions for us, we'll give evrythign except the mandatory sentence"
    boreds wrote:
    They should abolish prison sentances altogether for rapists and just have hired goons to beat them within an inch of their lives



    Why hire people, I'm sure you wouldnt have too much of a problem getting volunteers. Hell I reckon gards would do it in their spare time. I support such a move.



    The bleeding heart brigade and their whinging about prisoners havign it hard are getting their own way too much. Prison shouldnt cost anywhere near as much as it does to house prisoners. Thailand hav it the right way.


    A prison should be little more than a giant storage facility with small cages, not a place for criminals to go when they fancy some cushy rehab.


  • Options
    #11
    is_that_so
    Registered Users Posts: 32,136 ✭✭✭✭is_that_so


    RTE have a more complete story on it and on balance it was the best that could be done. While I agree with opinions on the general inconsistencies of sentencing , IMO Paul Carney is both one of the best at applying justice and also one of the most humane.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #12
    Thrill
    Registered Users Posts: 5,485 ✭✭✭Thrill


    boreds wrote:
    They should abolish prison sentances altogether for rapists and just have hired goons to beat them within an inch of their lives and be held down while the victim gets to anally rape them with a giant dildo.
    Do we have a part in our constitution about 'cruel and unusual punishment?

    You'd have to be careful though because for some of them this might be right up their alley (so to speak).

    I'd agree with the posters who say there should be mandatory sentences. 15 years for someone with sixty previous offenses sounds too light to me as this perv is a repeat offender who will not stop and is going to be at it again when he gets out.


  • Options
    #13
    bmaxi
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,859 ✭✭✭bmaxi


    Mr Justice Carney said he had considered imposing a life sentence after hearing what Cummins had said to his victim's daughter and granddaughter, but because of his age he could end up serving 55 years in jail and he was reluctant to do this

    That's a fcuking joke for a start, when did you ever hear of someone actually serving a life sentence?


  • Options
    #14
    dotsman
    Registered Users Posts: 3,635 ✭✭✭dotsman


    DonJose wrote:
    WTF is going on with our legal system. I can't remember one pedophile ever getting a custodial sentence for possessing child pornography, they all get off with suspended sentences.

    Paedophilia and child pornography are 2 totally different things. Paedophilia is the sexual assault of another human being while they are still a child. Child pornography is images/videos of children in a sexual manner from the very mild (kids in swimming togs/underwear) to the completely sick (being abused).


    The media love to make a scandal out of dirty old men charge with child pornography, but to be honest, linking the 2 so closely is like saying everybody who reads the sun (page 3) is a rapist!


    Dirty old men caught with child pornography should be investigated to see if they have ever harmed a child, and if not (thank god), should be pitied and given whatever medical/psychiatric treatment is available. (Those making/selling the child pornography should hang though - they're just as bad as the paedophiles)


    Not trying to excuse child pornography or anything - just saying that theirs a big difference...



    I do agree with you in general about the state of the justice system though! I think we were perhaps a little rash in removing the death penalty from our constitution (there's one or out there who I wouldn't lose any sleep over if the justice system got medieval on their ass);)


  • Options
    #15
    Sangre
    Registered Users Posts: 12,153 ✭✭✭✭Sangre


    dotsman wrote:
    Paedophilia and child pornography are 2 totally different things. Paedophilia is the sexual assault of another human being while they are still a child.

    No they're not really that different. Paedophilia is the sexual preference for children. Something you'd probably need to have kiddie porn. What you're talking about is child molestation or abuse...

    *pedant AWAYYYY*


  • Options
    #16
    InFront
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,698 ✭✭✭InFront


    Even in cases where the paedophile has not participated directly in the abuse of the child, but has purchased access to observing that abuse, he is nevertheless participating in the abuse of a real child by aiding and perpetuating the system, financially or otherwise. This kind of person is still a threat to children, even without laying a hand on one.

    The story of that old woman who was raped is awful, the rapist's behaviour in the court (staring at the family, his comment to the victim) suggests that he isn't even remorseful after it. 15 years doesn't seem like enough.

    I like the idea of being able to make victim impact statements, but in cases like that you get the feeling that the victim impact would be completely lost on him. I just don't think he'd get it.


  • Options
    #17
    WhiteWashMan
    Registered Users Posts: 20,099 ✭✭✭✭WhiteWashMan


    i like the idea of being able to use the blade dildo from Se7en on rapists.


  • Options
    #18
    Splinter
    Hosted Moderators Posts: 3,331 ✭✭✭Splinter


    WhiteWashMan wrote:
    i like the idea of being able to use the blade dildo from Se7en on rapists.
    i second that WWM....

    this makes me sick, in my eyes, you get one convinction fair enough, after a couple its kinda obvious where your headed and a quick baseball bat to the forehead should knock them on track...if not then back to the blade dildo...


  • Options
    #19
    Agamemnon
    Registered Users Posts: 2,367 ✭✭✭Agamemnon


    dotsman wrote:
    The media love to make a scandal out of dirty old men charge with child pornography, but to be honest, linking the 2 so closely is like saying everybody who reads the sun (page 3) is a rapist!

    No, because the Sun doesn't have pictures of women being raped on page 3. Anyone caught with child pornography is a potential threat to children and should do at least 2 years in prison. They are creating a market for images of sexual abuse and encouraging further crimes. Any judges that are soft on child porn and sex offenders have lost touch with reality.


  • Options
    #20
    The_Minister
    Registered Users Posts: 10,255 ✭✭✭✭The_Minister


    seamus wrote:
    I think one of the major issues with our legal system is that judges are allowed to overrule minimum sentences if the judge thinks it's unreasonable. They are a little out of touch with reality in my opinion.
    I think that they should be able to do that in certain circumstances, but the fact is that it is a grossly overused power, and I feel that some of them use it to show that they can (remember their reaction when McDowell commented lightly on this). It is a nessacery power, but it needs to be curbed somehow.


  • Options
    #21
    Time Magazine
    Registered Users Posts: 8,452 ✭✭✭Time Magazine


    agamemnon wrote:
    No, because the Sun doesn't have pictures of women being raped on page 3. Anyone caught with child pornography is a potential threat to children and should do at least 2 years in prison. They are creating a market for images of sexual abuse and encouraging further crimes. Any judges that are soft on child porn and sex offenders have lost touch with reality.
    He clearly stated that they can be an innocent as pictures of kids in swimming togs. Now if he's correct in that assertion, that's nowhere near as bad as seeing kids being abused.

    Edit: just to clarify, I don't condone people downloading pictures of kids in swimming togs. I'm simply saying that's less bad than downloading pictures of kids being abused.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #22
    Agamemnon
    Registered Users Posts: 2,367 ✭✭✭Agamemnon


    My point is that the images (of whatever form) and the abuse are not totally unrelated. There is a sliding scale of how bad an image can be but anyone who uses them as pornography is a potential danger to children. Would you let someone who got turned on by pictures of kids in swimming togs mind children? Of course not.


  • Options
    #23
    Degsy
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 16,397 ✭✭✭✭Degsy


    There's no less or more when it comes to child pornography.People who find it arousing are perverts pure and simple and as there is no issue of consent as there can be with adult unusual practises they are a danger to children.There appears to be a whole unwillingness to condemn peadophiles untill they actually commit murder or rape and this is unnaccetable.A certain well-known chef's family were allowed to tout thier view in the national media that he's bascly done nothing wrong and was being villified unjustifiably.


  • Options
    #24
    Time Magazine
    Registered Users Posts: 8,452 ✭✭✭Time Magazine


    Degsy wrote:
    There appears to be a whole unwillingness to condemn peadophiles untill they actually commit murder or rape and this is unnaccetable.
    I'm not condoning it, but looking at pictures of kids in swimming togs is a lot "better" than looking at them being abused and in turn is a lot "better" than raping them.

    It's a similar scale to randomly punching somebody, randomly beating the sh*te out of somebody and randomly killing somebody. Violence is not acceptable, but there's still a scale.


  • Options
    #25
    Degsy
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 16,397 ✭✭✭✭Degsy


    Ibid wrote:
    I'm not condoning it, but looking at pictures of kids in swimming togs is a lot "better" than looking at them being abused and in turn is a lot "better" than raping them.

    It's a similar scale to randomly punching somebody, randomly beating the sh*te out of somebody and randomly killing somebody. Violence is not acceptable, but there's still a scale.

    No.Children cannot protect themselves and thats why peadophiles are dangerous.Its not and adult hitting another adult,its somebody either potentially or actually harming children..this is not accetable and children must be protected from them at all costs.
    Its worth noting that a random survey of death row inmates in america found nearly all of them had suffered abuse as children.Nonces arent just hurting the victim,they're harming society too.


  • Options
    #26
    pokerwidow
    Closed Accounts Posts: 291 ✭✭pokerwidow


    agamemnon wrote:
    No, because the Sun doesn't have pictures of women being raped on page 3. Anyone caught with child pornography is a potential threat to children and should do at least 2 years in prison. They are creating a market for images of sexual abuse and encouraging further crimes. Any judges that are soft on child porn and sex offenders have lost touch with reality.


    And when they get out of prison they should be constantly tagged and placed on the sex offenders register, which should be published publicly every month.

    Why are the rights of these fcukers more important than my children and all the others in the country?


  • Options
    #27
    Time Magazine
    Registered Users Posts: 8,452 ✭✭✭Time Magazine


    This a little too OT or can we have a good debate on this? Don't want it locked.
    Degsy wrote:
    No.Children cannot protect themselves and thats why peadophiles are dangerous.Its not and adult hitting another adult,its somebody either potentially or actually harming children..this is not accetable and children must be protected from them at all costs.
    But simply because somebody downloads pictures of kids in swimming togs does not make them a rapist. Think of the whole innocent until proven guilty thing here.

    Second of all, I'd have sympathy for people who feel that way because in my opinion they have an illness. Now I don't have sympathy for cold-hearted child abusers, read that last sentence again. If people are attracted to children - and don't act on it - can you not see similarities to homosexual people? Over the last several decades the public have (rightly) been pushing for equal rights for gays. Now I know when gay people act out on it it's consentual adult behaviour and completely different to tempting/raping kids. However the feelings are similar, are they not?

    Right, I can see the flamings coming from here so let me clarify in advance. I am not saying homosexual lovin' is linkable to child abuse. I am not condoning child abuse. I am simply saying that people, including paedophiles, cannot help what they feel. The distinction arises, imo, when you act out on it. You see a hot girl in a nightclub and you want to sleep with her: no problem. You rape her: problem.

    Now paedos, medical definitions aside, have an illness. What do with them is the question. In the Western World we find some murderers "guilty but insane" so why is being a paedophile such a stigma? If somebody was to come out (excuse the pun) with their hands in the air and say "I'm attracted to children and want to clear on that" what would society's view on that be?

    Assuming that society would say "we're suspicious of you and maybe tag you (or whatever) but fair play" we can agree there are different levels of paedo, if you know what I mean. In the same way, looking at kids in swimming togs is not the same as paying for pictures of abuse.

    That's my point. Creating such a stigma will not help alleviate the problem, push such feelings further underground and, imho, is against their rights to be treated with dignity and respect.

    Meh, I didn't phrase much of that well and don't have enough time to do a better job but I think you get my point.
    Its worth noting that a random survey of death row inmates in america found nearly all of them had suffered abuse as children.Nonces arent just hurting the victim,they're harming society too.
    I agree completely, but what about innocent until proven guilty?


  • Options
    #28
    AdMMM
    Registered Users Posts: 9,472 ✭✭✭AdMMM


    I must say the responses in this thread have been some of the most mature ones that I've seen on AH in a long time! But for when the thread does (inevitably) degenerate, we can always take it to Humanities.

    As for these cases, I think the rationale behind the judge was somewhat flawed. From what I heard, he said that the reason why he didn't apply a custodial sentence was because of a similar case where he applied a 3 year custodial sentence only to have it appealed in the Appeal courts and he didn't see a reason to apply the custodial sentence if it was to be overturned a few weeks later.

    Surely each case should be judged on it's own merit and the judgement of other cases, however similar, should not have any bearing on the sentence!


  • Options
    #29
    nusername
    Closed Accounts Posts: 45 ✭nusername


    This is unbelievable, 1 rapist gets 15 years (shoulda been more) and another one gets 3 years SUSPENDED, ie a slap on the wrists :eek: :eek: both sick bastards broke into someone's house & RAPED someone :eek: :eek:

    Well, I've heard it all now :mad: I am utterly outraged at this & for the guards reading this & anyone else involved in this joke of a justice system, guess what alot of people will do now if they see an intruder in their house???? Knife in the ****in throat, then ring the guards & claim self defense, no point taking chances with these clown judges!

    I've seen some sick things in this country, but this tops it for me, same judge and all, wtf!!!


  • Options
    #30
    Snake Plisken
    Registered Users Posts: 12,484 ✭✭✭✭Snake Plisken


    Did I miss the debate on that 14 year old who went into the gay chat rooms and was groomed and passed around for sex by teacher/Garda/ lorry driver?

    downloading pictures of kids for any kind of sexual satisfaction is totally wrong as has been mentioned here its a downward spiral from there. Thats why I wouldn't allow even innocent family photos of my kids to be posted up on the net, you just don't know what kind of sick fcuks are going to look at them.

    As for the rape rulings, the Judges in this country are way out of touch. Remember that cooks husband Allen was left off after he downloaded loads of kiddie porn.

    We need to toughen up on all crimes be it peados/Rapists right down to joyriders

    Snake


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #31
    Wibbs
    Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 60,103 Mod ✭✭✭✭Wibbs


    Ibid wrote:
    This a little too OT or can we have a good debate on this? Don't want it locked.

    But simply because ../.. but what about innocent until proven guilty?
    While I don't agree with some of that post, I do agree with |.Murderer.| that quality of response like this is rare in After Hours. That can only be a good thing.

    Rejoice in the awareness of feeling stupid, for that’s how you end up learning new things. If you’re not aware you’re stupid, you probably are.



Advertisement